If it was 30-40 years ago, I would agree that the world of classical music is a very strict place filled with dissonance, etc. But NOW it's nowhere near there anymore! You can listen to Scotts music (check for editions musica ferrum), or my music, or the composers in the rosters of EMF and check what kind of music gets published there.
Then check the likes of John Psaths (Greek living in NZ), and his amazing trio (No. 3 please) and see how tonal and amazing and fresh it sounds...
After having checked your examples, Nikolas, I agree. I wasn't aware that tonality still had a foothold, though it appears to be more prevalent in foreign countries than here in the US where avant-garde rules.
I read your bio, Nikolas. I didn't realize you were that prominent a figure on the music scene. There ARE some success stories out there, thank God, or this would all seem so futile.
I wasn't successful tracking down the trio, though. It's not on your website or on YouTube or even under Google search.
Point is that (forgive me for saying this) that you've taken the negative route in your mind: "My music won't be performed because it's like that". I'm afraid that this is an easy excuse.
The blunt truth is that, as I think I've said before, you're missing plenty of elements in the whole package, so it's not just the music. I'm ready to bet that if Hans Zimmer works on a very classical (Baroque even) concerto, he'll find tons of people to play it. If a working, active, published composer gets a concerto up, with an impressive track record before him, he may have chances of getting any concerto up (as long as it's good). Someone who is very young (aged 12) and works on a nice sounding concerto will also get exposure.
Probably true. I know I'm at the bottom rung of the ladder and all the thinking in the world that I've written a masterpiece does me absolutely no good if no one hears it.
Interesting thing is consciously (or unconsciously) I tried to play by all the rules i.e. give the listener exactly what I thought they were looking for--mysterious grandiose opening, romantic secondary and tertiary themes, a boffo development section packed with one-two punches, a recapitulation worthy of Brahms' stormy First Concerto and a tranquil ending that would do the MacDowell 2nd proud. The ending to the concerto is straight out of the Tchaikovsky 1st and Rach 2nd playbook:
Advance to 1:40 Ending Piano Concerto No 2--1st & 3rd Mov's
Now if that doesn't wind up a piano concerto in grand fashion I don't know what does.
Point being that, good or bad, right or wrong, I tried to give a listening public what I thought it wanted: a good alternative to having to listen to the Tchaikovsky 1st & Rach 2nd for the 10,000th time because there is nothing out there that I know of that comes close to doing it. And I've listened to about 1,000 unknown concertos on YouTube. Precious few fill the bill for good melodies and exciting conclusions. Whether mine does or not is for others to decide but personally I thought it did. Now I'm starting to have my doubts because as you pointed out, Nikolas, if it did somebody would have picked it up by now---at least picked up the last movement anyway.
But then being a Tchaikovsky doesn't guarantee everything will be a smashing success either. I mean look at his 2nd and 3rd piano concertos which rarely ever get played today. Frankly, take away the big opening tune of his 1st and all you've got is another 2nd. And I know that Hans Zimmer has a better shot because of his name, but a concerto would probably flop miserably because nobody, I think, takes film composers seriously as classical composers. John Williams doesn't seem to have had stupendous success with his serious works. Ernest Gold wrote one of the most famous tunes in movie history (Exodus) but his Piano Concerto, written when he was seventeen, was a failure even after he became famous because the N.Y. critics branded it "movie music"---what he called "the kiss of death" for a serious work. The concerto is on YouTube, by the way and is never played.
Joey, I'm glad you took the time hear "Shadows". I think you got my point. I used to see just what you've been seeing until I started exploring lesser known repertoire and composers. Then I found that there was more diversity than I thought (and it's been getting better over the last 20 years), and actually, performance possibilities are not impossible, but it depends on the area of the earth you're looking at. For a big work like yours, it's difficult anywhere, but smaller pieces have a better chance (that's one reason you don't hear about many brand new symphonies).
But it's all possible, in theory. New operas get performed even today! And concertos.
Yeah, I've tried writing small, Scott---God knows it's a heck of a lot less trouble---but for some reason I just can't do it, I don't know why. My mind just keeps drawing these big symphonic multi-movement works. That's partly why I kinda gave up composing--too much work for an old codger like myself, endlessly clicking the mouse putting notes on a score and rewriting and rewriting. And it really only started out as a desire to fulfill a teen dream to write a piano concerto. So forty-five years later I fulfill it and now
where do I go.......
Nice job on that Prelude V, by the way, Scott. I enjoyed it very much--a perfect blend of tonality with modern harmony.